Immigration Question Fox News Won’t Ask (Every Voter Needs to Know)

Immigration is one of the most important issues, if not the most important issue, in the 2016 presidential election. However, most debates, including the Thursday debate on Fox News, will leave voters largely in the dark on just how the candidates will handle the matter. There likely will be questions on securing the border and what to do with the 11-20 million people who are in this country illegally, but here are the all-important questions that likely will go unanswered:

Currently there are 71.8 million working-age U.S. citizens and immigrants who are either unemployed, not in the labor force, or forced to work part-time. Does it make any sense to continue admitting over one million permanent residents a year, and several hundred thousand guest workers since so many Americans and legal immigrants need full-time employment?

One of the arguments for admitting unskilled workers is that they do the jobs that Americans won’t do. If we stop the flow of unskilled workers, isn’t it fair to say that this will drive up wages for these jobs and make them more attractive to American workers?

On the other side of this coin is the plight of skilled American workers who were laid off because their employers have imported some 650,000 foreign workers under the H1-B and L-1 programs to replace them at half the going wage. Disney and Southern California Edison recently have been exposed for this practice. Presently, two-thirds of entry level IT jobs go to foreign workers through the H1-B program. Would you abolish it?

A big reason skilled foreign workers are willing to work for these wages is that it allows them to by-pass the immigration process and, in a few short years, become citizens. Would you abolish this practice?

Currently 75% of our science, technology, engineering and math graduates are unemployed in these fields, yet American companies continue to import STEM workers. Many of these foreign workers make the transition right from American colleges and universities. What would you do about that?

Approximately 300,000-400,000 babies are born here each year to foreign mothers who have entered our country illegally. That’s approximately one in ten births. Our country and Canada are the only remaining advanced economies that offer citizenship to children born to illegal aliens. What would you do about this?

Politicians who favor allowing those who have broken into our country to stay often make the argument that we can’t separate families, referring to those who have an anchor baby or two? What’s keeping those families from taken their children home with them?

Another 35,000 women enter our country legally as tourists for the sole purpose of giving birth in order to side-step the immigration process. What would you do about this?

Currently, most Illegal immigrants who are apprehended at the border or ports of entry are simply given a ticket and allowed to enter the United States and told to show up for a court date. Will you end this policy and simply stop them at the border or detain them at ports of entry until they can be returned to their countries of origin?

Current law requires legal immigrants and their American sponsors to certify that they will be economically self-sufficient. However, 49 percent of households headed by a legal immigrant receive some form of government assistance. Will you enforce the public-charge doctrine?

Would it surprise you to know that only two of the five remaining candidates have said they would end birthright citizenship? A third said, “It makes no sense.” One supports it and the other pretends it was settled by the 14th Amendment.

Would it surprise you to know that only two of the five remaining candidates have said they will enforce current law and deport those who are found to be here illegally? One of the two says he would allow the “good ones” to return, whatever that means. One would allow those here illegally to register to become guest workers and two support a pathway to citizenship.

Would it surprise you to know that only two candidates would suspend the H1-B program? A third would triple it with some changes and allow all foreign college students to remain here after graduation. The other two have not been challenged on this all-important issue.

Unfortunately, these questions likely won’t be asked of the candidates in the Fox News debate. You must find the answers for yourself. Don’t simply vote and hope for the best.

If King Hussein, Lady Macbeth, and the RINOs who control the Republican party were deliberately trying to destroy the country, they would not do anything differently. Uncontrolled immigration (look at the unfolding disaster in Eurostan)is the quickest way to destroy a nation.
As I have pointed out in various posts before, there is nothing in our former Constitution that says, or even implies that illegal aliens have any right to stay here, or any right to a hearing before being summarily deported.
But even Constitutionally guaranteed rights like the right to a jury trial apply only to citizens, and, by tradition, to foreigners who are here legally. Illegal alien gang bangers could be summarily executed (and would be, if we were not ruled by traitors). For that matter, Border Patrol agents, police, military personnel, and even citizens could shoot the invaders as they come across the border or at any time thereafter, even if they had not committed any further crimes.

Oops! I missed this weekly post by Jane. She poses some important questions. And Wm. Stoecker always has some valuable comments. I’m willing to try Trump. I’m sick of the inaction and deplorable direction the Republican Party has followed. Just today I saw J.C. Watts, supposedly a good conservative Republican Party member say he would have a tough time voting for Trump and Trump’s candidacy would be a bad thing for the Republican Party. My question to Watts is “what Republican Party?” They have been so closely aligned with the Democrats for so long, no longer is there a significant difference.

You raise some good points. I think the borders should be controlled for security reasons, possible overpopulation reasons and for the simple reason of enforcing laws. Also, the born-on-American-soil law def. should be revisited.

I think your economic arguments are one sided. I used to write websites for employment attorneys, and they told me again and again that US employers are less competitive when they can’t hire from overseas as needed. And the U.S. has always thrived with immigrants. Their presence adds to the demand for housing, and their economic activity has benefits and helps grow the economy. I believe the idea that they simply take jobs away from Americans is only part of the picture.

I know of US citizens that have been denied work in favor of the H1-B applicant and I’m speaking of the tech field. What is wrong with picking up your baby/child and taking him/her back to parents home land, there should be no right to stay when entry is illegal.
The fact that we are in such dire straights with regards to jobs for our own citizens should be enough to say hold off further immigration.
Who’s counting? with thousands entering illegally every month! I do not see how a drop from 20 Mllion to 11million (we were told) thousands of children coming across weekly and we still maintained a number of just 11 Million?! I guess it is what is called Common Core Math.
It is our government that has their heads buried in the marshes that is putting it politely.